Why Tannehill should be a better QB now Lazor is gone

If you read my first statement, you will see that I stated I want to see how Tannehill develops under Gase. Yet I also predicted the Dolphins will likely finish next season 6-10.

I feel the Dolphins have has better rosters the past few years than they will likely have heading into next season. They lost better talent in free agency than they have signed, IMO. So unless they have a great draft and get at least 3 immediate quality starters, I really don't think this team will have as much talent as the teams the past three years.

I believe the one major upgrade they made during the offseason was the hiring of Gase. So if the Dolphins have another losing season and Tannehill shows consistent improvement under Gase during the season, I will be satisfied with him beyond 2016.

I have nothing agaisnt Tannehill other than I just think he is rather mediocre at this stage of his career. I agree that if he is surrounded with a great defense and a quality OL, this might be enough for him to lead the team to the playoffs eventually.

My only agenda in regards to the QB position for the Dolphins the is I want a QB who can win SB's when surrounded with quality talent on the roster. I just am not convinced Tannehill is a QB who can ever win a SB.

Right now the team is not filled with a lot of talent and Tannehill is certainly better than any other QB now on the roster. He will be the starter in 2016 and will have the opportunity to prove to Gase he deserves to be the starter beyond this coming season.


My opinion of Tannehill is that he is okay for now, but hopefully he will get a lot better or the Dolphins need to start looking for his replacement. In the end, he doesn't have to prove anything to me or anyone else on this forum because we don't hire or fire anyone on the Dolphins. He simply has to prove it to his coaches, the front office and his teammates.

 

I did read your first statement. But again, in that same paragraph you said:

...which is, absolutely, you saying if Thill wasn't the problem we'd have been in the playoffs, like Luck. Surely, you can see that?

 

Why does everyone say Tannehill needs greatness around him? The dude hasn't even had average talent around him, and he's produced, in very bad circumstances, and the Dolphins have been 8-8 two of his four years. Rookie season 7-9, last season 6-10. Last year was a complete wreck, though, so only the biggest hater is blaming Tannehill for that.

I still believe you get average talent around Tannehill, and the Dolphins win, and Tannehill looks awesome.

 

Well, I hope we have an AA QB this year then. What impresses me the most in a QB is his ability to pick his team up and lead them to victory....especially from behind...grab their face masks....get them focussed on the task at hand...that HAS to change THIS year, or we need to find a new QB. And by the way, just to get this straight, I am pulling for Tannehill to succeed but I can also be honest enough with myself to know that he has 2 very BIG hurdles that he needs to overcome this year.

(#1) Pocket Awareness.....He just has to get a handle on this. A QB has to be able to either see the pressure coming, or feel it coming. When this happens, he needs to learn how to either move up in the pocket or side to side, or with his talent at running the football,he needs to haul azz...take off running....He will get us many additional first downs this way or at least nice yardage on them. Now, I know there will be instances where the line breaks down everywhere and thus an unavoidable sack which happens to EVERY QB in this league. What he also cannot do is stand back there in the pocket with plenty of time to get rid of the ball and then freeze up, duck, and take a sack that should never be a sack...He has to read his receivers much quicker and rip it. With Marino back helping him again without Philbin's jealousy, I think this part of his game can improve drastically if he listens to Dan and practices very hard at it. I would even have Dan rip it to the receivers as well where Ryan can also learn it from watching him as well.

(#2) Leadership.......Now, I think we all know that he has really stunk it up in this part of his game as well. I think with Gase,Christiansen, Hardegree, and Marino working very hard with him, his leadership skills can and HAVE to improve or we will have to seriously consider making a change at the QB position, which is the most important position on the team. When the players are down, disengaged,running wrong routes,dropping passes, or need encouragement, who do almost all players on offense look to? The QB !!!!! This is a BIG and IMPORTANT part of his job as well and we need Ryan to change from being introverted in this area, to being extroverted. Again y'all, this is year #5 coming up for him in the NFL and this is the year of no more excuses....it is about to get very expensive for us to move forward with him next year and if he does not improve tremendously I these 2 areas along with being as good or better in all other aspects of his game,then we will have to draft a QB in the first round, so we get him on the lesser expensive 5 year rookie deal. One guy y'all will all enjoy checking out his game is Patrick Mahomes, Texas Tech QB. This guy has really got the talent all the way around. You will see as you watch some clips of him on YouTube or any other site that shows film on players or whole games etc....enough about him for now, as I originally stated that I am rooting for Ryan to get over the hump this year and be the Leader and QB that he has all the tools to be....this is all jmho and how I feel about it.

 

Look at the list of recent SB winning QB's. Since 2004, the winners are: Tom Brady, Ben Roethlisberger, Peyton Manning, Eli Manning, Drew Brees, Aaron Rodgers, Joe Flacco and Russel Wilson. All those QB's are considered by practically everyone in the NFL to be better (or much better in most cases) than Tannehill.

You have to go back to 2003 where Brad Johnson led Tampa Bay to a SB win before you see an example of a not-so-good QB with a good enough team around him.

Furthermore, most of those SB winning teams had a really good team, not just QB!

So it's unrealistic IMO to suggest an average QB with an average team has a decent shot at winning the SB. No, you need a great surrounding cast with an average QB to win. Or more likely, you have elements of a really good team and elements of an average team coupled with a well above average or elite QB to win. So yeah, I think Tannehill needs a great surrounding cast and it's really hard to provide that, which is why if he doesn't produce this year I'm for drafting a new QB.

 

Ummm...if we can go 8-8 with a defense that gives up 30 points like it's nothing, an oline that can't block, mostly average receivers, non-existent run game, and coaches that can't coach, I think it's very likely that we would make the playoffs with Tannehill doing exactly what he's done all along. I didn't say anything about winning the Super Bowl.

 

Doesn't the bold confirm what we've been saying?

 

On pocket presence...you have to have an oline that doesn't allow pressure from multiple angles. I saw plenty of time Tannehill would feel pressure from the edge, and go to climb the pocket, only to get sacked by the interior of the dline spicing the interior of the oline back. Or, Tannehill try to go outside because of pressure from the interior, only to get gaskets by pressure from the edge. What I'm saying, and FinD and I have argued all along, is that for him to use his athleticism consistently, he needs to have a place to escape, or rather, lanes to escape. Because the oline was such a trainwreck, four rushers often were able to close all lanes.

As to the leadership, do any of you think that maybe, JUST MAYBE, having a coach and OC undercut you and try to get rid of you created a situation where Tannehill couldn't take control, or players wouldn't listen? I mean, you're blaming Tannehill for something that in all likelihood, was a direct result of inept and pathetic coaching.

 

Was going to comment the exact same freaking thing.

 

You didn't say anything about winning a SB, but you asked why some people are saying Tannehill needs a great surrounding cast. Since I posted earlier on exactly that topic, it implicitly referenced winning the SB. Besides, the ultimate goal is winning the SB and for that I think you need a well above average QB.

Well I'm certainly not one of the posters that thinks the surrounding cast is unimportant, so in that sense we agree. The disagreement with me (if there really is one) comes from what it takes to win the SB. So far I haven't seen Tannehill produce at a level where I'd say the chances of us winning the SB with an average surrounding cast are decent.

 

I think when people talk about leadership and pocket presence as problems Tannehill has had (and I'm one of those that's said this), we're trying to lay blame on the QB only when it looks like he should take the blame and not the OL (or harder to determine.. coaching).

For example, why Tannehill does not take off and run when he has a lane, or why he doesn't shift in the pocket when other QB's might, or why he sometimes lets an onrushing defender just sack him when it's really clear he saw him.. those are the cases where I think you lay the blame on the QB.

Keep in mind I think most of the blame is on the OL, but subtract the effect of the OL out and you see a QB with sub-par pocket presence.

Leadership? You don't see the fire with Tannehill much (it's rare really), you don't see the comeback stats etc.. (which btw is an argument that still holds even after Pauly's stats). Point is, some other QB's seem to (hard to measure of course) will their team to win, at least in the eyes of many observers.

 

Comebacks are a TEAM EFFORT! QBs on ****ty teams aren't going to have great comeback records.

My opinion is that a QB with a lousy oline is going to have moments of indecision, and look bad, even on the rare occasion that the oline sort of does their job, because he hasn't been able to develop the trust and instincts because he's always under ridiculous pressure.

And before anyone tries to use Wilson, the dude has elite escapability, and should not be the bar anyone uses to determine the ability of another QB.

 

Yeah, but go back to the stats I've posted repeatedly about Tannehill's performance when trailing with 2 or 4 minutes left relative to his performance (with the same team) when tied or leading under the same conditions. That drop-off is way bigger than for other QB's. So that's statistical evidence that Tannehill is performing worse relative to other QB's under the same conditions, after subtracting out the contribution of the team.

 

Yet, that could easily be because of poor oline and poor play calling. In fact, looking at the tape, the evidence is literally all over the place those are the main culprits. In those situations the defense can tee off on the oline. This is not complicated.

 

Only theoretically could it be that IMO. I personally don't see our OL being astronomically worse in precisely those situations. I like you think the OL is crappy almost all the time.

 

The stats I'm talking about are different than yours. They are the stats for Tannehill when leading/tied vs. trailing in the last 2 minutes or 4 minutes or the game. Those have either been real bad or average for each of his 4 years.. averaged over the 4 years, it's worse than most starting QB's.

You can get the stats from here: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/T/TannRy00/splits/

 

FinD, I hope that y'all do not see my post as "agenda" type, because it is just my opinion, first, and foremost and I am behind Tannehill and I am in his corner. Obviously I know that his game improved every year,except for last year and I believe that was due to the tremendous turmoil within the whole organization. But, I can still be honest with myself about what Ryan needs to improve on that will put him in the upper tier of QB's. I believe the biggest and most important way to develop a good QB who has all of the tools to be great is with really good coaching, in which we all know has sucked for every one of his 4 years. He will now be learning g his 3rd offense in his 5th year and I feel like that finally Gase & Co. are the right coaches to call the game maximizing Tannehill's complete skill set, and this year should be by far, his best year in the league. Again, being totally honest about the situation, we really do need to find out, before his contract becomes massive, if he can greatly improve on his pocket awareness and his leadership. I feel that for him to get the most out of himself, he just has to get better at these 2 issues and neither have anything to do with how any outbreak mate performs. These 2 areas are all on him, and the coaching and he will have some of the best in the biz working with him, including Marino. Believe me, in other areas of his game he is already "there" except for lousy Oline play,not enough talent at certain skill positions,dropped passes,etc. This is his year though, year 5.....He either get's it this year, or he don't, and that for my part is just being honest on what I feel he needs to do to lead the Dolphins for the next decade.

 

The sample size seems incredibly small (22 attempts vs 104 attempts, 0 attempts in 2 min with lead), looking at the number of times he's tied or leading with 2 min or 4 min to go, compared to the steps when he's behind with 2 min or 4 min. So he's been bad when trailing...which is exactly what Pauly was elaborating on. Late in games, Lazor and Philbin had already abandoned the run, and jig was up.

And his stats weren't real bad when leading or tied. They might be average, but Ol' Queasy wasn't known to put his foot on the gas pedal when he had even the smallest lead. He went all conservative, so why would anyone expect Tannehill's stats to be spectacular in those situations?

 

I don't believe you or jw have an agenda. I just take exception to the notion that W/L record is a QB stat or an indicator of a QBs ability (not saying you did that). Its just not.

 

They aren't "crappier" at those times. The defense is more aggressive at those times. They are still playing at the same horrible level, but the defense they are facing is being more aggressive. This is precisely what pauly was talking about. Its also, WADR, something you're analysis has always ignored.

 

Sample size is always an issue, but that's the same for all QB's. It just means the variance will be greater. Doesn't change the difference between Tannehill and other starting QB's.

Defense is more aggressive for all teams in those situations. So the analysis I did took it into account by comparing the drop-offs across QB's, not the absolute values for performance.

 

Yeah, opposing defenses could rush four and get pressure, but late in games, just for kicks, they'd rush five or six and Tannehill would be on his *** almost before he got out of his drop

 

If you can show this ONLY happened to the Dolphins (the extra defensive pressure that is) during those situations, then I'll give your (and Fin D's) theory more credit.

 

Really? All QBs had around five times more attempts in losing situations than ahead/tied? I mean, we're talking about Tannehill, and he had 22 attempts with a lead/tied vs 104 attempts when losing...and you're trying to draw meaningful analysis from that? With a coaching staff that routinely abandoned the run in the first half, even when only down one score? Is that normal for all other QBs? Does your analysis account for that?

Pauly gave analysis trying to focus on the coaching, and it's effect, and it's being ignored in favor of analysis that doesn't factor in coaching, it only looks at the QB.

 

Watch the games. I routinely was posting this stuff in gameday threads after plays. We've been arguing for a long time that pressure stats don't ever take into account the number of rushers, they only count if a QB was pressured.

 

In both areas, if you 're-read MY post, I compensated for both instances that you bring up about the Defense closing all lanes etc...has nothing what-so-ever to do with Pocket Awareness....and the leadership, I mentioned the coaching, I mentioned the oline, receivers etc...there was nothing at all wrong with our RB's or running game, other than they did NOT run the ball enough....You guys simply do not get it with my opinion on what needs to happen and I am in Tannehill's corner, rooting hard for him to succeed because we, more than anything, need stability and longevity out of our coaching staff and our QB.AGAIN, I like Tannehill and WANT him to be our starter for years to come, but, o my if he can improve in those areas. If he does, he will move up to elite status and lead us to a lot more come from behind, 4th quarter victories.....What frustrates me Res, with yourself and Fin is, you act like he can do no wrong....that he does not need to improve in any areas to become a top tier QB, and you're not being honest with yourself with all due respect...But, I think he will have a great year with our new hands on coaching staff.

 

You're missing the significance of "sample size". Whether one is 5x more or less is irrelevant. The absolute number of "22" is relevant. That's not that large, and when you brought up "sample size" that's a valid point.

Compare to Flacco:
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/F/FlacJo00/splits/

He's been around a bit longer, but still has only like 30ish lead/tied. You generally want something more in the 50's/60's sample size for something like this I'd think (hard to tell without looking at the actual game-by-game data though).

And while I commend Pauly for trying to tease out coaching, it's really really difficult to do. As I pointed out before, you can actually show Tannehill's consistency increased during Lazor's years if you look at game-to-game variance (to mean). All depends on what stats you look at.

 

We all watch games. I don't see the Dolphins being the ONLY team where the defense tries to rush extra players. Maybe you do? The situations are similar based on my experience across the league, which is why the stats have some utility here.

 

And again, you can have two olines be statistically comparably bad but be actually be worse at different things. For example, you can have two olines that rate pretty poorly, but one is much worse at pass protection while the other is much worse at run blocking (that is just a very basic example to make my point). Other teams' crappy olines may be less crappy at dealing with a bull rush for example. And has been stated numerous times, the stats you use don't account for how many people break through the line or if they are staggered, jailbreak, etc. All of these things dramatically change the outcome. Also, a crappy oline can have better play calling protections. Other QBs probably had the ability to audible out of the play based on the defense.

None of that is accounted for in your stats, which makes them essentially worthless for this conversation.

 

But is it similar to how many break through? And how fast? The answer is no.

 

No stat accounts for every possibility, so that makes every stat worthless according to your argument.

I'll go with stats even if they're incomplete over just a possibility, especially there are so many "possibilities" suggesting it was Tannehill.

 

Are we the ONLY team with highly predictable play-calling in those situations? If no, then the analysis holds.

 

Nice! That's new info I didn't have (can't tell from the formula alone.. you'd have to do what you did, and thanks for doing that!).